On (02/05/11 01:31), Bruce Ashfield wrote: > On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 11:56 PM, Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfi...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 9:14 PM, Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> Hi > >>> > >>> I am trying to test this patch > >>> > >>> http://uclibc.org/~kraj/perf-tool-Fix-gcc-4.6.0-issues.patch > >>> > >>> to fix the build using gcc 4.6.0 but the kernel patching for yocto is > >>> not as usual as other recipes > >>> since it uses entire set of tooling around it. > >>> > >>> I tried to look around for documentation and few references I found > >>> > >>> https://wiki.pokylinux.org/wiki/Wind_River_Kernel > >>> > >>> discourages putting patches in metadata. and in another document it > >>> says it uses git to do patching but does not explain how. > >>> > >>> So if someone can explain in simple terms how to patch a linux-yocto > >>> would be really helpful from a > >>> developer POV or any documentation will be helpful. > >>> > >>> How do people develop/test patches on linux-yocto I understand > >>> eventually they are desired to be part > >>> of linux-yocto git but that comes after they are tried and tested locally > >>> > >>> I would have preferred to have the usual SRC_URI patching atleast for > >>> local testing. As of now > >>> it seems not to use normal OE recipe procedures. > >> > >> Are you actually not seeing this work ? I put in place compatibility > >> with existing patching via the SRC_URI for just this reason. A patch > >> specified in the SRC_URI will be picked up by the tools and applied > >> to the end of the BSP branch during the patching phase. > >> > > > > if it worked. I would not be writing this email :) > > :) you never know, I didn't see your error message so I didn't want > to presume. > > But I spoke too soon earlier, I had a bbappend in my layers that > meant I was modifying the wrong SRC_URI to have your patch > applied. > > When I modified the right SRC_URI like so: > > +SRC_URI = > "git://git.yoctoproject.org/linux-yocto-2.6.37;protocol=git;nocheckout=1;branch=${KBRANCH},meta;name=machine,meta\ > + file://perf-tool-Fix-gcc-4.6.0-issues.patch" > > (i.e. the obvious way) > > I see the patch applied to the end of my BSP branch: > > > git branch > master > meta > yocto/base > yocto/eg20t > yocto/emgd > yocto/gma500 > yocto/standard/arm-versatile-926ejs > yocto/standard/base > yocto/standard/beagleboard > yocto/standard/common-pc-64/base > yocto/standard/common-pc-64/jasperforest > yocto/standard/common-pc-64/sugarbay > yocto/standard/common-pc/atom-pc > * yocto/standard/common-pc/base > > commit 2500f7dc4d6c0d8b2f5ddad6369ee4541456533a > Author: Kyle McMartin <k...@mcmartin.ca> > Date: Mon May 2 01:26:49 2011 -0400 > > commit fb7d0b3cefb80a105f7fd26bbc62e0cbf9192822 upstream. > > GCC 4.6.0 in Fedora rawhide turned up some compile errors in tools/perf > due to the -Werror=unused-but-set-variable flag. > > I've gone through and annotated some of the assignments that had side > effects (ie: return value from a function) with the __used annotation, > and in some cases, just removed unused code. > > In a few cases, we were assigning something useful, but not using it in > later parts of the function. > > kyle@dreadnought:~/src% gcc --version > gcc (GCC) 4.6.0 20110122 (Red Hat 4.6.0-0.3) > > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mi...@redhat.com> > LKML-Reference: <20110124161304.gk27...@bombadil.infradead.org> > Signed-off-by: Kyle McMartin <k...@redhat.com> > [ committer note: Fixed up the annotation fixes, as that code > moved recently ] > Signed-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <a...@redhat.com> > [Backported to 2.6.38.2 by deleting unused but set variables] > Signed-off-by: Thomas Meyer <tho...@m3y3r.de> > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@suse.de> > [Backported to linux-yocto kernel git version] > Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> > > I did modify the patch format slightly, since git am needs to be able to > grok the patch for it to apply. > > Did you get any sort of error message when your patch didn't apply ?
When I did a build from scratch then it worked fine. Have you already taken this patch in ? if not what needs to be done ? -Khem _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core